Spartacus Maximus

Yes it sure is, but common sense if also commonly taken for granted or overlooked in favour of emphasizing secondary points. If for instance a person has a technically excellent and powerful technique, it will certainly fail if said person has not learned and sufficiently practised timing or distance.

Sometimes personal ambitions for gain or politics can interfere with the practice of a martial art. Just because they train in the same exact system it unfortunately does not necessarily follow that martial arts practitioners will agree with one another. More often than not there will be differences of emphasis in training as well as interpretations of certain concepts from one instructor to another. This is usually the source of rivalry between schools of the same lineage/style.

Most if not all Okinawan styles of karate have a mawashi geri that follows a small arc often targetting the thinner leg bone at point slightly above the ankle where there is less tissue and easier to break. Contact is made with the point where the foot joins the ankle, which is conditionned through training to withstand impact by kicking or controlled striking.

Painful to watch. Hopefully it was a worthwhile match for tenshin to make up for all the knuckle sandwiches he ate. It was nearly as bad as those other one-sided fights videos where an average joe stupidly and/or drunkenly challenges a pro fighter in a ring. The big question besides the money is what exactly will this fight do for either fighter’s career.

Everyone has some character flaws and being skilled, admired and respected for is never a guarantee nor an indication of a person’s moral quality. When an individual does something morally contemptible and criminal, the consequences are limited. It is always much worse when such a person belongs to a group, in which they have an important role of authority and influence. The damage caused by the actions of these people extend far beyond their direct victim. It can even go so far as destroying the trust, reputation and credibility of anyone and everyone who are/were associated with them regardless of being aware of what they have done. This very situation made it extremely difficult to be accepted because the previous instructor’s teacher was in a high position in the association but had been found guilty of high-level fraud and other more serious crimes. Doors slammed shut at the mere mention of the name. Once again recently there was a case where a direct student of a reputable Okinawan teacher has been found guilty of an extremely despicable and hateful crime involving victims who were minors. Some his students and worse still some were his own blood. This man was an 8th dan who had trained under the same okinawan teacher for decades. Not only in good standing, but also appreciate, well-like and highly trusted by our teacher. He was even the highest representative and reference for our lineage and school in his country as well as several around. Has anyone else had to deal with the consequences of such a person’s actions? When the rotten apple is an authority is it really fair to also shun and break with their students as well? How would your school deal with this?

One point about swords is that for the entire history of the Ryukyu Kingdom and beyond, they were weapons that only the privileged classes could possess or afford. The Ryukyus did not have the resources to produce blades in significant numbers and therefore had to obtain either the raw materials or the finished weapons through trade. The training in swordsmanship and other blades weapons came from Chinese teachings and later from Satsuma Samurai. Ryukyu nobles has access to such training opportunities because they had the connections to be in contact with Chinese or Japanese experts, and travel to train under them. An often overlooked fact is that many Ryukyuan martial arts/Tuide experts were also equally brilliant swordsmen in addition to several other weapons not included in ”kobudo” as it is known now. For example, Matsumura Sokon the originator or Shorin-ryu was also an expert in the Jigen-ryu school or swordsmanship, which is the style taught to Satsuma samurai. Azato(Friend and fellow of Itosu and teacher or Funakoshi) was also known to be a fine blade.

It makes sense to follow whatever the general interpersonal relationship codes call for wherever one might be. That or the personal preference of whoever is being addressed. This is common sense everywhere, not just in a martial arts school context. In some cultures peers call eachother by first name, but in others hierarchy is so important that everyone must know who is senior to whom and there are words or “title” forms of address that are used and even expected. It is however a rare and strange thing for anyone to expect or demand being called “Chief something or other” or even just “mister”

The idea that farmers and fishermen came up with kobudo isn’t entirely false. It just didn’t happen the way it has been popularized by some martial arts stories. The facts that the popular stories leave out is that the farmers and fishermen were formerly wealthy nobles or even royal lineage. All men who had been trained in martial arts and with several types of weapons. The social upheaval of the time forced many of these people to become fishermen, merchants or farmers to continue to make a living after losing their wealth and status or being stripped of them. They continued to train and practise in secrecy and their familiarity with weapons lead them to devise ways to adapt and use the tools of their new trades for training. This phenomenon is just about as old as the formal annexation of the Ryukyu kingdom by the Empire of Japan in the late 1880’s. None of the reknowned practitioners and teachers of that period or after are of lower birth. Every single one is noble or higher samurai class.

Why not simply be called “teacher” or whatever equivalent? For larger schools with more than one instructor it will certainly become obvious who everyone will look to as a reference for martial arts techniques and directing/running the school. When training in Okinawa the “chief instructor” is just whoever is in charge of a dojo. Usually called “sensei” or teacher and the most senior dan grade is called Shihan or “assisting instructor”. Running a dojo and having students(with approval and permission) makes one an “full instructor”. However, when training at the hombu dojo, the “grandmaster” or head of the lineage is refered to as sensei by everyone because the dojo belongs to that instructor and all others are students. Small dojo’s/schools really have no use for titles like “Chief Instructor”. It makes everything more complicated than necessary and can create much friction. Nobody is ever forced or coerced into training in a given school and neither is anyone held there against their wishes. The school owner or whoever started the school decides how to teach, what to teach and everything else about how things are done. Students and other instructors if any must follow or else they are free to seek instruction and training elsewhere.

Having a list of specific techniques is less practical than focusing training on principles common to several techniques. A practitioner may have favourite techniques, but these might not be appropriate or applicable to the situation. If principles are well integrated it is easier to move without conscious thought about techniques and seize an opportunity.

Whatever the reason for punching someone in the face it is temporary, just like giving a fish which will only satisfy until one needs another. Unless there is some kind of hidden meaning or joke, neither of the two have anything to do with one another. Except maybe that both are temporary solutions to something that could be resolved by offering to help a person become self-reliant. Also it could emphasize the idea that the quickest fix might be less profitable than sharing knowledge and skills.

I offer the following time slots for adults: Adults only: Monday's and Friday's at 8.15 to 9.15pm Family (adults + children): Wednesday's at 7.00 to 8.00 pm By adults around the dojo do you mean people who frequent those locations? This might be difficult as my Monday class is at a cricket clubhouse in the middle of a residential estate and my Weds and Friday class is at a dance school on an industrial estate. The adults around the dojo are those who are already students. Hand them an anonymous(no names required) form to fill in asking specifically why they chose your dojo(what they like about it) over whatever else is available in and around town. Also ask the adult parents/guardians of the youths/children the same questions. There will certainly be some useful information from that. Essentially, a customer/client survey like any other type of service oriented business might do to improve their customer relations and experience. Ask them directly and to the point what THEY think would bring in more people.

Perhaps it is the time slots or schedule which might not be optimal. Most adults lead busy lives with time constraints. The better part of their time spent on earning a living or studying full-time. It might help to conduct a casual survey by asking the adults around the dojo and among acquaintances questions about when and how frequently they’ve time for themselves. Also reasons why they may or may not want to join a martial arts or sports club. Then try attracting adult students based on that info

Whether a martial arts school or boxing gym, there are no rules or guidelines that apply everywhere. The way of doing things correctly depend on whoever is in charge of the place and the only way to know what to do or how to prepare is the simplest and most obvious: ask the one in charge of the place about open training directly! Expect to need/bring the minimum gear such as training wear and safety gear. Better over prepared than not at all.

A good teacher knows more than one way to teach. The “Krease” type characters only have one and it is one of the least effective. Another important thing to consider is that different purposes require different teaching methods and approaches. Teaching someone to win a sporting match within a set of rules is different from teaching self-defense. Neither of those two purposes can nor should be taught with the same methods or approach as teaching soldiers to deal with an enemy whose mission it is to kill. The opponent in a sporting match is not willfully intent on maiming or killing. The competition is bound by a set of rules both sides agreed to follow. As for self-defense, the defender cannot and must not deal with any situation as if in mortal danger because self-defense is defined by the law; and also for the simple fact that there are different degrees of violence an ordinary citizen might face. With a quick escape while avoiding serious injuries as the goal, techniques that would certainly kill or maim are neither necessary nor desirable.

In reality an instructor with a teaching style and personality like the John Kreese movie character usually doesn’t last very long. The only thing fear and violence teach is that a bigger stronger person can use them to control others. It isn’t the same as teaching people martial art skills to overcome and use the fear and violence they might face. Skilled instructors know how to do that without being obnoxiously arrogant, overbearing or abusive.

It is unfortunately too common for parents to get carried away with their child’s interests. Especially where some kind of direct competition is involved. There are so many ways for a parent to support and encourage their child in martial arts without interfering with training or being disruptive.

Consider applications as principles rather than specific individual techniques. In a kata/form moving, blocking and striking may appear to be done separately in application all these parts are integrated. There is no such thing as single sided techniques. In Okinawan karate terminology it is called “meotode”, which means “husband and wife hands”. The idea is that hands are always used together and blocking or parrying and striking are done simultaneously.

Instructors who accept teaching minors/children rarely if ever explicitly forbid or oppose parents or guardians to watch. In many cases doing that would be a liability. What should be explicitly and strictly forbidden is disruptive behaviour and interference by said parents supposedly “watching” because their own personal definition of watching includes such things as loud obnoxious cheering, unwanted coaching, interruptions or badgering the instructor with criticisms while the instructor is teaching.

Starting at the beginning should logically be expected if it is something completely new and radically different from whatever one has experienced or trained before. What is difficult for some to do or accept because of ego or other reasons is restarting the same or a very similar martial art under a different instructor.

A lot of martial arts practitioners are known to actively select most/all their everyday clothes based on the range of movement possible when worn. This could sound a bit obsessive, but it makes perfect sense if one’s regular training aside from that done in a dojo/school is in every day attire such as plain clothes or even whatever is worn on a usual workday.

The founder definitely came up with a good and interesting idea. The recommendations of the exercises are very easy to integrate into a martial arts solo training session. It has been 14 years since it was first invented and the variety of moves is great. Have other karate practitioners familiar with shovelglove noticed the striking similarities between the moves of shovelglove and the traditional Okinawan/Chinese strength training? Notably with tool line the chiishi, stone padlocks etc ? Some movements are nearly identical.

Is anyone else out there familiar with the “shovelglove” exercise? What do you think of it as a workout?

One of the more literal meanings of the Japanese term is “pulling hand”. This is to emphasize and explain that the hand/arm movement has an important function which is essential to the effective body mechanics required for effective application of hand techniques.

Looking. No other techniques can work without looking in the right place at the right time. Without it one cannot judge what to do or where to move. One must look to see openings or and seize opportunities to counter whatever attack comes wherever it is aimed.